CBC Relaunches Newsworld

[Bluenoser]

As of Monday, October 26th, CBC is rebranding Newsworld as CBC News Network...

http://www.cbc.ca/arts/media/story/2009/10/21/cbc-news-renewal.html

The new sked:
http://www.falltvpreview.com/images/schedules/cbcnewsworld.pdf

Over on the main network, CBC is cutting 5 min off the end of The National to run a 10-min local newscast leading into The Hour at 11:05.

 

[blackgold]

It won't be too long until you see Radio-Canada do the same to their Reseau De Information.

 

[Yeziknoradio]

It'll indeed be interesting to see how things pan out in ratings land...wether or not they'll do better than CTV's News channel.

 

[Goldilocks94941]

Does anyone know if either CBC or CTV have ever tried to get carriage on cable TV systems in the US for their news channels? Since there are essentially no all-news channels anymore on cable in most of the States (seriously, you can't count CNN or "Fox" as "news"), and usually no international news channels like BBC or CNN Int'l offered either, it would be interesting if some cable system with hundreds of digital channels dedicated a few of them for all-news operations (preferably without the commentator shows or one-story hours) -- even if it means going "abroad" to see what "the neighbours" are saying.

I know most Canadians have access to the unvarnished American cable TV channels. It doesn't work the other way around. Can it partly be the fault of Canadian networks not trying to gain access, even, at least, in the border markets? Or is there a fee structure that cannot be broached without upsetting some mafioso somewhere?

And is the "new" CBC Newsworld worth the fuss? (As noted above, I can't see it in Seattle.) Must say I'm underwhelmed at the recent changes to The National - flashing background graphics and extended commentary and "analysis" and standing up and gesturing with the hands "just like the American TV guys are doing it" does not grab me like the solid news content that used to dominate the hour.

Your thoughts?

 

[azumanga]

Does anyone know if either CBC or CTV have ever tried to get carriage on cable TV systems in the US for their news channels?

The CBC did have "Newsworld International", which was seen a few years back until Al Gore bought it, becoming "Current TV".

 

[Yeziknoradio]

Does anyone know if either CBC or CTV have ever tried to get carriage on cable TV systems in the US for their news channels?

The CBC did have "Newsworld International", which was seen a few years back until Al Gore bought it, becoming "Current TV".

That would mean that there is not enough demand for Canadian news in the States because television is a business before it can be anything else, and no one out there took the time to fill that void.

I guess no one on the American side cares. You'd think border towns might wish to have something though...

 

[Goldilocks94941]

The border town comment is a big part of my point. In the years before cable caught on, when most folks had Genie rotating TV antennas with which they could pick up Canadian TV signals from 40 or 70 miles away, plenty of people would do so. Today, I only know of a few border states where only the CBC channel is available on cable now, and always hidden away on channel 99 or elsewhere away from where the US network channels are found.

And across Maine a few years ago, I only found French SRC and a French commercial station from Sherbrooke on cable, and no English CBC at all. Surprisingly, there's no Canadian content of any kind of cable in Alaska.

I live less around 50 miles from Victoria, and Vancouver is the next market away. Yet only CBUT is carried by Comcast in western Washington state. Cable operators in Detroit and Toledo, and I presume Buffalo, include the local CBC outlet, and that's it. When each of these tried to remove them in the past, subscriber protests made them relent.

Yet with little or no spot news channels on cable anymore, the Canadian perspective, more so than "Canadian news" should certainly be able to attract some audience over here, and not just in the border markets. After all, isn't the technology providing hundreds of cable channels intended to provide some sort of "specialized" interest channels?

So what's the reason no Canadian cable channels are seen in the US? Particularly the news networks, and perhaps even include APTN, for unique and pertinent programming that's not duplicated by other cable channels in the US. Plenty of areas of significant Native (First Nations, as you call it) populations have nothing on TV in the US to reflect their communities or address their needs and interests.

And what will it take to get Canadian programmers to try to get on a few US systems? Does no one in Canada want to been seen outside the country?

Don't blame Americans for being ignorant of Canada and its issues (as most are) without trying to reach them with channels that can include some of that Canadian-produced content.

 

[azumanga]

...across Maine a few years ago, I only found French SRC and a French commercial station from Sherbrooke on cable, and no English CBC at all.

I do know for a fact that CKSH, the Radio-Canada station, is seen on cable as far south as Lowell, Massachusetts -- in many areas, without an English CBC. Don't know if TVA or another French channel (apart from TV5MONDE) is seen on cable far from the border (certainly not on Comcast in Burlington).

 

[dustintv]

So what's the reason no Canadian cable channels are seen in the US? Particularly the news networks, and perhaps even include APTN, for unique and pertinent programming that's not duplicated by other cable channels in the US. Plenty of areas of significant Native (First Nations, as you call it) populations have nothing on TV in the US to reflect their communities or address their needs and interests.

APTN is a great service up there out of Winnipeg, but it's just not feasible in the US unfortunately. Out of Canada's 33 million people, about 4% are aboriginal/indigenous. Out of 300 million people, about two million people have some native blood representing a mere 1%. Thus we have BET instead and a ton of Spanish-language networks instead. Lots of people sympathizes with them but do not fully understand the true conditions. Some people aren't even sure if they even exist anymore because most Americans-be they white, black, Hispanic or Asian will encounter never them. The "sovereign nation" ideals place them at the bottom of any priority from the government. Many natives themselves try to distance themselves from their tribes because of tribal gov corruption. The native pop situation is completely different in the US than it is in Canada, and just wouldn't fly

 

[w9wi]

And what will it take to get Canadian programmers to try to get on a few US systems? Does no one in Canada want to been seen outside the country?

Those Canadian stations that air significant amounts of U.S. programming (i.e., everyone but CBC) probably *don't* want to be seen outside the country. They'd be blacked out most of the time due to syndicated exclusivity...

 

[Goldilocks94941]

Is there really such a thing as syndicated programming exclusivity anymore? I sure don't see it at play in the last few years concerning shows that air on both my local stations and the basic cable channels. Only difference might be a couple minutes more commercial time on the cable-only channels (or it feels like it). Heck, who even offers exclusivity for not placing commericals next to those of competitors anymore?

I still think that the USA is a large enough country that we ought to have some more regional TV services. And it doesn't have to just be geographically based.

My example of Aboriginal TV which airs on cable across Canada might not be seen as a priority in central Pennsylvania, but it sure would be relevant almost anywhere west of the Mississippi - urban markets, as well as "on the rez."

The point is if you don't let people see positive images of "their own kind," and if the rest of the community never gets to see these different types of people represented in programming on a routine basis -- be it hosting news and talk shows, or in drama, comedy, and sports, then you will continue to have backwards social attitudes all over the place. 900 freakin' channels on my cable system in Washington state and not an Indian on anything more than a test signal pattern!

I don't think it's unreasonable to expect a little more. And if someone can't make it work in the states (such as AZN TV's recent failure of a younger second generation Asian-AMerican type of network), then, Canadians, extend your brand southward and triple your audience, even as a third tier specialty channel, in the USA.

 

[RegularJoeRG]

I live less around 50 miles from Victoria, and Vancouver is the next market away. Yet only CBUT is carried by Comcast in western Washington state. Cable operators in Detroit and Toledo, and I presume Buffalo, include the local CBC outlet, and that's it. When each of these tried to remove them in the past, subscriber protests made them relent.

Buffalo gets CBLT (CBC, Toronto), CFTO (CTV, Toronto) and CHCH (Ind. Hamilton) on cable.

 

[azumanga]

Buffalo gets CBLT (CBC, Toronto), CFTO (CTV, Toronto) and CHCH (Ind. Hamilton) on cable.

Actually, CHCH is not available on cable in Buffalo, at least not on Time Warner. I think it's still available on TWC's system in Niagara Falls.

 

[Yeziknoradio]

Buffalo gets CBLT (CBC, Toronto), CFTO (CTV, Toronto) and CHCH (Ind. Hamilton) on cable.

Actually, CHCH is not available on cable in Buffalo, at least not on Time Warner. I think it's still available on TWC's system in Niagara Falls.

From what I understand, CHCH is only available over the air through good old fashioned rabbit ears in Buffalo.
The new owner (Channel Zero) is doing well with his All news and movies format. It's a shame Niagara falls USA (at least) can't get the station on Cable because they do seem to cover quite a bit of Niagara reigon news for both sides of the border.

 

[arnoldevns]

A couple of answers for everyone here.
1. Newsworld being taken off cable in the US had nothing to do with whether people here did, or did not, have an appetite for Canadian news. It was a simple matter that Al Gore had a channel he wanted to put on and could buy Newsworld cheap enough to launch in enough homes to make his business model work. No problem with that, just sorry it got rid of Newsworld in the process.
2. Americans are overwhelmed with news channels. Cable companies really don't have a lot of room to add channels. They might be able to add one more, but it would be hard to make much money on it. The likelyhood it would get significant enough viewership for enough advertisers to buy commercials to make it a financial success is questionable.
3. From what I have seen, CBC uses a lot of video from the networks here. They would likely have to rework their contracts for that video to allow them to broadcast it here. This might not be that difficult though. The BBC does the same with ABC here and their cable news channel is on my system here.
4. Hate to say, but there really isn't much interest in Canadian news here. Up north in places like Detroit and Buffalo there probably is, but not in New York, Los Angeles, Chicago or Dallas.

 

[Goldilocks94941]

Sorry, but Comcast in Seattle, and in most other markets where it's the principle game in town, from what I can determine, is very stingy with providing channels for "news." I don't count political diatribes as news. I'm talking spot news, where there's at least 20 or more reports an hour.

In Washington state and Oregon, there is a regional spot news channel, which airs a few special magazine programs when their local affiliates run their newscasts, and tend to repeat hours several times over. And that's it. No BBC Newsworld, except for the odd hour on BBC America, which is geared to the Eastern time zone. CNN and CNN Headline rarely offer an overview of the news, domestic or international. Nancy Grace is not news. CNBC is largely informercials at night in the Pacififc time zone. And MSNBC is not really a news channel, either. And don't get me started about what the hell "Fox" is trying to do.

And that's it. No CNN International, no BBC, no CBC, no CTV, no ABC News Now, no nuthin' that covers the world -- just the shocker du jour and ad nauseum speculation on political horse races and horse shyte. Not even if I pay for a higher tier than the $130 I'm already paying a month is there something for the viewer who is educated and wants to know more about what's going on around the world.

And that's why I suggest one of the Canadian networks try to get some carriage in the USA. Not that we're all dying to learn about Parliament and the Harper administration's Bush-light shenanigans (tho' it does help to know something about how it works, or doesn't up there). There has been a reputation of covering the world with some depth in Canada. Good writing, reporting, and not always me-centric around some beauty queen. Not that I count the freshly dumbed down The National with its American-style sports music under a less-than-60-seconds glimpse of mouth-gaping horrors around the world as a good example any more. Pity.

We NEED to know what's going on the in the world, without the sneers and jeers of the cable networks we get in the USA, paid handsomely by their corporate masters to skew the view of the world to make AMericans very afraid of anything and everyone who doesn't tow the Republican party line. Maybe TV is not really a news medium any more.

 

[marshallstax]

At my work we had DirecTV for a time, which got me into The National, the US version of Newsworld, and such things as ">Play" the show Gian Ghomeshi did from the corner bar built into the CBC Mothership building in Toronto.

All I can say is I'm so glad that The National continues to be available online, along with The Hour and selected bits from other shows... I only wish that the rebranded "CBC News Network" was available 24/7 online, like "France 24" is... Probably a money & rights issue, eh?